Free The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) Case Study Solution | Assignment Help

Harvard Case - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

"The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" Harvard business case study is written by Benjamin C. Esty, Florian Bitsch. It deals with the challenges in the field of Finance. The case study is 22 page(s) long and it was first published on : May 7, 2013

At Fern Fort University, we recommend a thorough review and renegotiation of the Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) to address the significant challenges faced by the consortium. This should involve a comprehensive analysis of the financial structure, risk allocation, and operational efficiency of the project, with a focus on maximizing shareholder value while mitigating potential risks.

2. Background

The Kashagan oil field, located in the Caspian Sea, is one of the largest oil discoveries in recent history. The development of this field was undertaken by a consortium of international oil companies, including Eni, ExxonMobil, Shell, Total, ConocoPhillips, and KazMunayGas (KMG). The project was governed by a Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), which outlined the terms of the partnership between the consortium and the Kazakh government.

The case study highlights the numerous challenges faced by the consortium, including:

  • High development costs: The project faced significant cost overruns due to technical complexities, environmental concerns, and delays in construction.
  • Complex operating environment: The remote location, harsh weather conditions, and political instability in the region posed significant operational challenges.
  • Disagreements over profit sharing: The consortium and the Kazakh government clashed over the distribution of profits generated from the oil field.
  • Environmental concerns: The project faced scrutiny over its potential environmental impact on the Caspian Sea ecosystem.

Main Protagonists:

  • Consortium: The group of international oil companies responsible for developing the Kashagan field.
  • Kazakh Government: The sovereign entity holding ownership of the oil field and negotiating the PSA with the consortium.
  • KMG: The Kazakh national oil company, a key stakeholder in the project.

3. Analysis of the Case Study

The case study can be analyzed using a framework that encompasses the following key aspects:

  • Financial Analysis: The consortium's financial performance needs to be assessed, focusing on the profitability of the project, the cost of capital, and the return on investment (ROI). This analysis should include a detailed examination of the financial statements, cash flow projections, and the impact of the PSA on the consortium's overall financial position.
  • Risk Assessment: The case study highlights numerous risks associated with the project, including operational risks, political risks, environmental risks, and financial risks. A thorough risk assessment should be conducted to identify, quantify, and prioritize these risks, allowing for the development of mitigation strategies.
  • Strategic Analysis: The consortium's strategic goals and objectives need to be aligned with the long-term viability of the project. This analysis should consider the consortium's competitive position, the market for oil, and the evolving political landscape in Kazakhstan.
  • Operational Analysis: The efficiency and effectiveness of the project's operations should be assessed, considering factors such as production capacity, cost optimization, and environmental sustainability.

4. Recommendations

To address the challenges faced by the consortium, the following recommendations are proposed:

  • Renegotiate the PSA: The consortium should initiate negotiations with the Kazakh government to revise the PSA, addressing key issues such as profit sharing, risk allocation, and the cost structure. This renegotiation should aim to create a more equitable and sustainable partnership, ensuring a fair return on investment for the consortium while acknowledging the government's interests.
  • Optimize Operations: The consortium should implement a comprehensive operational efficiency program, focusing on cost reduction, process improvement, and technology adoption. This could involve exploring alternative technologies for oil extraction, streamlining logistics, and optimizing the use of resources.
  • Enhance Risk Management: The consortium should strengthen its risk management framework, focusing on identifying, assessing, and mitigating potential risks. This could involve developing contingency plans for unforeseen events, implementing robust environmental protection measures, and engaging in proactive political risk management.
  • Improve Communication and Collaboration: The consortium should foster stronger communication and collaboration with the Kazakh government, KMG, and other stakeholders. This could involve establishing a joint working group to address key issues, promoting transparency, and building trust through open dialogue.

5. Basis of Recommendations

These recommendations are based on the following considerations:

  • Core Competencies: The consortium's core competencies lie in oil exploration, development, and production. The recommendations aim to leverage these competencies while addressing the specific challenges of the Kashagan project.
  • External Customers and Internal Clients: The recommendations consider the interests of both the consortium's shareholders and the Kazakh government, aiming to create a win-win scenario for all stakeholders.
  • Competitors: The recommendations acknowledge the competitive landscape in the oil industry and aim to position the consortium for long-term success.
  • Attractiveness: The recommendations are expected to improve the project's profitability, reduce risks, and enhance the consortium's overall financial performance.

6. Conclusion

The Kashagan project presents a complex and challenging case study, highlighting the intricate dynamics of international business, government relations, and the oil industry. By implementing the recommendations outlined above, the consortium can navigate these challenges, optimize the project's performance, and maximize shareholder value.

7. Discussion

Other alternatives not selected include:

  • Withdrawal from the project: This option would involve the consortium relinquishing its stake in the Kashagan project, potentially leading to significant financial losses.
  • Continuing with the existing PSA: This option would maintain the current terms of the agreement, potentially leading to continued challenges and conflicts.

Risks and Key Assumptions:

  • Political instability: The political situation in Kazakhstan could deteriorate, impacting the project's stability and profitability.
  • Environmental regulations: Stricter environmental regulations could increase the project's costs and complexity.
  • Oil price volatility: Fluctuations in oil prices could impact the project's profitability.

8. Next Steps

To implement these recommendations, the consortium should:

  • Establish a dedicated task force: This task force would be responsible for leading the renegotiation of the PSA, implementing operational improvements, and enhancing risk management.
  • Develop a detailed implementation plan: This plan should outline the specific actions to be taken, timelines for completion, and the resources required.
  • Engage with key stakeholders: The consortium should proactively engage with the Kazakh government, KMG, and other stakeholders to build consensus and ensure a smooth implementation process.

By taking these steps, the consortium can transform the Kashagan project from a source of challenges into a successful and profitable venture.

Hire an expert to write custom solution for HBR Finance case study - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

Case Description

When discovered in the 1990s, the Kashagan oil field was the second largest oil field in the world. The project sponsors (equity investors) signed a 40-year production sharing agreement (PSA) with the Kazakh government in 1997, with the expectation the field would be developed at a total cost of $57 billion and would be pumping oil by 2005. Unlike most contracts in the energy industry, the Kashagan agreement was a "flexible PSA" meaning the contractual terms-the allocation of risks and returns-depended on ex post realizations of such things as capital costs and profitability. The parties incorporated contingencies into the contract to make it fairer and more flexible, and to ensure it remain viable over the project's 40-year life. Due to a combination of problems and challenges, the project was still not done in mid-2007. At that time, the sponsors, led by the Italian energy company ENI, announced the project would not be completed until 2010 and the total cost was likely to be $136 billion. Although oil prices had risen dramatically between 1997 and 2007, thereby making the project worth considerably more, the Kazakh government indicated its desire to renegotiate key provisions of the contract. The sponsors had to decide whether to renegotiate the contract and, if so, which parts.

🎓 Struggling with term papers, essays, or Harvard case studies? Look no further! Fern Fort University offers top-quality, custom-written solutions tailored to your needs. Boost your grades and save time with expertly crafted content. Order now and experience academic excellence! 🌟📚 #MBA #HarvardCaseStudies #CustomEssays #AcademicSuccess #StudySmart Write my custom case study solution for Harvard HBR case - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

Hire an expert to write custom solution for HBR Finance case study - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) FAQ

What are the qualifications of the writers handling the "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" case study?

Our writers hold advanced degrees in their respective fields, including MBAs and PhDs from top universities. They have extensive experience in writing and analyzing complex case studies such as " The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) ", ensuring high-quality, academically rigorous solutions.

How do you ensure confidentiality and security in handling client information?

We prioritize confidentiality by using secure data encryption, access controls, and strict privacy policies. Apart from an email, we don't collect any information from the client. So there is almost zero risk of breach at our end. Our financial transactions are done by Paypal on their website so all your information is very secure.

What is Fern Fort Univeristy's process for quality control and proofreading in case study solutions?

The The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) case study solution undergoes a rigorous quality control process, including multiple rounds of proofreading and editing by experts. We ensure that the content is accurate, well-structured, and free from errors before delivery.

Where can I find free case studies solution for Harvard HBR Strategy Case Studies?

At Fern Fort University provides free case studies solutions for a variety of Harvard HBR case studies. The free solutions are written to build "Wikipedia of case studies on internet". Custom solution services are written based on specific requirements. If free solution helps you with your task then feel free to donate a cup of coffee.

I’m looking for Harvard Business Case Studies Solution for The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA). Where can I get it?

You can find the case study solution of the HBR case study "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" at Fern Fort University.

Can I Buy Case Study Solution for The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) & Seek Case Study Help at Fern Fort University?

Yes, you can order your custom case study solution for the Harvard business case - "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" at Fern Fort University. You can get a comprehensive solution tailored to your requirements.

Can I hire someone only to analyze my The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) solution? I have written it, and I want an expert to go through it.

🎓 Struggling with term papers, essays, or Harvard case studies? Look no further! Fern Fort University offers top-quality, custom-written solutions tailored to your needs. Boost your grades and save time with expertly crafted content. Order now and experience academic excellence! 🌟📚 #MBA #HarvardCaseStudies #CustomEssays #AcademicSuccess #StudySmart Pay an expert to write my HBR study solution for the case study - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)

Where can I find a case analysis for Harvard Business School or HBR Cases?

You can find the case study solution of the HBR case study "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" at Fern Fort University.

Which are some of the all-time best Harvard Review Case Studies?

Some of our all time favorite case studies are -

Can I Pay Someone To Solve My Case Study - "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)"?

Yes, you can pay experts at Fern Fort University to write a custom case study solution that meets all your professional and academic needs.

Do I have to upload case material for the case study The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) to buy a custom case study solution?

We recommend to upload your case study because Harvard HBR case studies are updated regularly. So for custom solutions it helps to refer to the same document. The uploading of specific case materials for The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) ensures that the custom solution is aligned precisely with your needs. This helps our experts to deliver the most accurate, latest, and relevant solution.

What is a Case Research Method? How can it be applied to the The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) case study?

The Case Research Method involves in-depth analysis of a situation, identifying key issues, and proposing strategic solutions. For "The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)" case study, this method would be applied by examining the case’s context, challenges, and opportunities to provide a robust solution that aligns with academic rigor.

"I’m Seeking Help with Case Studies,” How can Fern Fort University help me with my case study assignments?

Fern Fort University offers comprehensive case study solutions, including writing, analysis, and consulting services. Whether you need help with strategy formulation, problem-solving, or academic compliance, their experts are equipped to assist with your assignments.

Achieve academic excellence with Fern Fort University! 🌟 We offer custom essays, term papers, and Harvard HBR business case studies solutions crafted by top-tier experts. Experience tailored solutions, uncompromised quality, and timely delivery. Elevate your academic performance with our trusted and confidential services. Visit Fern Fort University today! #AcademicSuccess #CustomEssays #MBA #CaseStudies

How do you handle tight deadlines for case study solutions?

We are adept at managing tight deadlines by allocating sufficient resources and prioritizing urgent projects. Our team works efficiently without compromising quality, ensuring that even last-minute requests are delivered on time

What if I need revisions or edits after receiving the case study solution?

We offer free revisions to ensure complete client satisfaction. If any adjustments are needed, our team will work closely with you to refine the solution until it meets your expectations.

How do you ensure that the case study solution is plagiarism-free?

All our case study solutions are crafted from scratch and thoroughly checked using advanced plagiarism detection software. We guarantee 100% originality in every solution delivered

How do you handle references and citations in the case study solutions?

We follow strict academic standards for references and citations, ensuring that all sources are properly credited according to the required citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.).

Hire an expert to write custom solution for HBR Finance case study - The Kashagan Production Sharing Agreement (PSA)




Referrences & Bibliography for SWOT Analysis | SWOT Matrix | Strategic Management

1. Andrews, K. R. (1980). The concept of corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 139-148.

2. Ansoff, H. I. (1957). Strategies for diversification. Harvard Business Review, 35(5), 113-124.

3. Brandenburger, A. M., & Nalebuff, B. J. (1995). The right game: Use game theory to shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 73(4), 57-71.

4. Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory. Harvard Business Review, 81(9), 66-74.

5. Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator's solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth. Harvard Business Review Press.

6. D'Aveni, R. A. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. Harvard Business Review Press.

7. Ghemawat, P. (1991). Commitment: The dynamic of strategy. Harvard Business Review, 69(2), 78-91.

8. Ghemawat, P. (2002). Competition and business strategy in historical perspective. Business History Review, 76(1), 37-74.

9. Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.

10. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard--measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.

11. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy. Harvard Business Review, 82(10), 76-84.

12. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67.

13. Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. (2008). Strategy safari: A guided tour through the wilds of strategic management. Harvard Business Press.

14. Porter, M. E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 137-145.

15. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Simon and Schuster.

16. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press.

17. Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.

18. Rumelt, R. P. (1979). Evaluation of strategy: Theory and models. Strategic Management Journal, 1(1), 107-126.

19. Rumelt, R. P. (1984). Towards a strategic theory of the firm. Competitive Strategic Management, 556-570.

20. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.